DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE: October 21, 1994
                                                          
 
 
                             GSBCA 12964-P
 
 
                             IRI SOFTWARE,
 
                                           Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
                       DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY,
 
                                           Respondent,
 
                                  and
 
                         PILOT SOFTWARE, INC.,
 
                                           Intervenor.
 
        Joseph  P. Hornyak,  Caryl  A.  Potter,  III,  Elizabeth  A.
   Ferrell, and Debra  A. McGuire of Sonnenschein Nath  & Rosenthal,
   Washington, DC, counsel for Protester.
 
        Walter  Thomas, Jo Hilda DuBose, and Michael Briskin, Office
   of  General  Counsel, Defense  Logistics Agency,  Alexandria, VA,
   counsel for Respondent.
 
        Garry S.  Grossman and Robert  E. Little, Jr., of  Fenwick &
   West, Washington, DC, counsel for Intervenor.
 
   DANIELS, Board Judge (Chairman). 
 
                                 ORDER
 
        IRI  Software (IRI)  protested  that  the Defense  Logistics
   Agency (DLA) acted contrary to  statute and regulation in issuing
   a solicitation to  only one firm,  Pilot Software, Inc.  (Pilot),
   for   the  acquisition  of  executive  information  system  (EIS)
   software.  IRI complained that  because its products can meet the
   agency's  actual minimum  needs  in  a way  which  is more  cost-
   effective   than  Pilot's   products  can,   DLA   has  no   real
   justification for not permitting competition to fill those needs.
   Pilot intervened in the protest.
 
        On the eve of hearing,  after lengthy negotiations which the
   presiding  judge facilitated at  the parties' joint  request, the
   parties  settled their  differences.   Ten  days later,  with the
   concurrence  of the  other two  parties,  IRI filed  a motion  to
   dismiss the protest without prejudice.   The motion asks that the
   dismissal be  converted to one  with prejudice five  working days
   after DLA amends the solicitation in question  in accordance with
   the parties' settlement  agreement.  The  agreement has not  been
   filed with the Board.
 
        To  effectuate the parties' wishes, the protest is DISMISSED
   WITHOUT   PREJUDICE.    This  dismissal  shall  become  one  with
   prejudice on the date specified  in the motion to dismiss, unless
   any  party earlier  moves for  reinstatement  of the  case.   The
   Board's  order suspending  DLA's authority  to  proceed with  the
   protested procurement lapses with the issuance of this order.
 
                                      _________________________
                                      STEPHEN M. DANIELS
                                      Board Judge